Hot Topics:

Our take: Exercise gun rights responsibly

York Daily Record/Sunday News editorial

Updated:
01/25/2013 03:29:38 PM EST

Not long ago, when a seeming anomaly in crime statistics designated Stewartstown as the sixth most crime-ridden municipality in York County, it seemed very strange. After all, Stewartstown will never be confused with Deadwood.

But now, a small band of gun owners - members of the Libertarian Party - are trying to erase the distinction by making the sleepy little borough resemble a town from the Wild West, where everybody carries a firearm.

They showed up at this past week's borough council meeting to challenge the town's restriction on civilians carrying firearms in government buildings. Their leader, Evan Mentzell, secretary of the Libertarian Party of York County, said he had attended a meeting last month, packing heat, and was told, "You can't have that in here."

And strangely, the law might be on the gun owners' side. "Localities cannot regulate the possession of firearms if the possession is otherwise lawful under state law," said Michael Dimino Sr., an associate professor at the Widener University School of Law in Harrisburg. "I have found that state law prohibits it in or near a court or in or near a school, but not in a government building."

That, of course, is ridiculous. Permitting people to carry firearms in government buildings is irresponsible - a recipe for potential disaster and tragedy.

All of us support people having rights and standing up for them. In many instances, and in the current national debate on gun control in the wake of the Newtown school shootings, gun rights advocates seem to skip over the part of the Second Amendment that includes the phrase "well regulated.

Advertisement

" Not to be picky about the meaning of words, but that means that the government retains the right to regulate firearms.

In this case, Stewartstown should be well within its rights to forbid civilians from carrying firearms in its borough council hall. It's common sense. It's not an infringement of anyone's rights.

But that might not be the case. If Mr. Dimino's interpretation of the law is accurate, and we have no reason to doubt it, it would take an act of the Legislature to amend the gun law to forbid weapons in government buildings. (Not surprisingly, the state forbid civilians from carrying weapons in the state Capitol, where visitors have to pass through a metal detector to enter. That security is good enough for the state Legislature, but not local government employees and elected officials.)

Don't hold your breath. This Legislature and Gov. Tom Corbett appear disinclined to push any new laws that would restrict firearms and increase public safety.

That aside, every time gun advocates make something as ridiculous as this an issue, it paints all gun owners in a bad light. Gun advocates argue that responsible gun owners should not be restricted from carrying their weapons wherever they wish - an act that reasonable people could conclude is irresponsible. Responsible gun owners don't show up at kids' soccer games or a borough council meeting packing a sidearm.

Expecting gun advocates to understand that irony - standing up for responsible gun owners while acting irresponsibly - is a fool's errand, though. They push this point despite the fact that it does their cause more harm than good and sullies the image of truly responsible gun owners, the ones who don't feel nostalgia for the Wild West.